All things take time to create. And great things like the city of Rome take a very long time. Likewise, here in the California State Legislature, grand endeavors often take more than one two-year legislative session cycle. The legislative process is convoluted and complex. Political principles often trump the rational. And sometimes, lawmakers just don’t take the time to get it.
For three years, I have tenaciously fought to legally
define “heritage schools” - a.k.a. cultural language schools - in state code.
These schools meet after school, on the weekends and
during the summer, outside of the public school structure.
They complement a child’s compulsory education and are bound by their commitment
to teaching foreign language and history in an effort
to help the student compete in an increasingly global
economy and maintain California’s diversity and cultural heritage.
Heritage schools are more than “language schools,” and they play an integral role in our communities.
They are a major source of language and heritage instruction
at the K-12 level, as well as tutoring in other subjects.
They help prepare students for courses in advanced
language and literature at colleges and universities
at no cost to the taxpayers.
Some public schools even grant credit to students for
classes taken at these heritage schools.
In the state’s current fiscal environment, this seems like a very
worthy avenue.
Up and down the state, the Chinese, Armenian, German,
Russian, Jewish, Vietnamese, Japanese and Korean communities
all have these schools. These schools rely heavily
on parent volunteers and the teachers and administrators
often come from their native country and are highly
skilled and educated. You would be surprised, in fact,
to learn how many in the Capitol community attended
a heritage school growing up or have kids who attend
presently.
So then, what seems to be the problem?
I first learned of the schools’ legal plight when some in my district were closed
by the state. Regrettably, absent legislation, more
of these schools will be shut down. Currently, heritage
schools operate under the radar. They are not under
the state’s authority, and we don’t know how many are in operation within California’s borders. A snag occurs, however, when the Department
of Social Services (DSS) becomes involved.
Since heritage schools are not defined in state code
as educational entities, DSS views them as childcare
centers. Without proper child care licensing requirements,
DSS creatively interprets existing law, or forces these
schools to shut down, denying future generations of
students the rich cultural opportunity these schools
provide.
Over the years, heritage schools have sought out governmental
authorities in attempts to comply with state law, but
a clear distinct standard for these specific schools
is lacking. DSS doesn’t know what to do with them and the schools find the
process disjointed, confusing, arbitrary and difficult.
For three years, I have sought to educate state lawmakers
about the need to legally define heritage schools.
And for the most part, members from both sides of the
aisle have responded in a positive way. Last year,
I was pleased to work closely with Senator Leland Yee
(D – San Francisco/San Mateo). Most legislators are attentive to the fact the issue
needs to be addressed.
Despite that progress, we are still in search of a
solution that balances the need for basic health and
safety standards for heritage school students while
also promoting their growth and continued existence
for future generations.
Heritage schools keep our kids proactive after school,
help our public schools achieve higher test scores,
and help us as a state and as a nation to be better
prepared in a world economy.
Yet we must acknowledge that most of these “schools” lack the facilities, funding, and other resources
of a typical school or childcare center.
Many of them are staffed by volunteers who hold a limited
number of classes where ever they can.
These are not childcare centers looking for a way to
avoid important safety regulations; these are dedicated people who are devoted to the
preservation of their cultural heritage and to help
the kids excel academically.
Any legislative proposal should not impose requirements
that ultimately would force them to close their doors.
I have introduced a bill to clearly define heritage
schools. Senate Bill 1116 will create an affidavit submission requirement for
these schools; one that is modeled after and virtually the same as
is required of private schools. For three years, I
have explored different routes to determine how best
to keep the doors of these heritage schools open.
After countless discussions, policy hearings and debate,
requiring heritage schools to file an affidavit with
the Department of Education is the most logical path
to freeing heritage schools from overbearing government
regulations.
The requirement to file an affidavit ensures adequate
protection for the students without placing an onerous
licensing requirement on the schools. The measure offers
heritage schools a pathway toward legality. It will
not only clear up confusion but will reduce the burden
to the state and provide a safer environment for students
enrolled in the programs.
Rome wasn’t built in a day, and sometimes sound state policy
can’t be constructed without a multi-year crusade. Nevertheless, as Rome was worth building,
heritage schools are worth saving.
